From: "Glenn Meadows" 

It will for sure, remain to be seen though, as I pointed out, OPEC is quite
able to adjust their combined output DOWN to neutralize the capacity we
bring on board.  They can turn the valves off, just as well as they can
open them to stay ultimately in control.

The biggest key though, is demand.  With the Chinese market heating up, and
their demand/requirements going up, I see tight supply, high prices for
some time to come.  Smaller cars, hybrids are in our future, for sure.

--

Glenn M.
"Gary Britt"  wrote in message
news:430f34e9$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> While I agree that we need to add refining capacity, I don't agree that
> increased production would have little effect on the price of oil.  The
> facts as pointed out in a long message to John, show otherwise.
>
> Gary
>
> "Glenn Meadows"  wrote in message
> news:430f1154{at}w3.nls.net...
>> Increases on the production side will have little effect, till we add
>> additional refining capacity to the mix.  Our refineries run at near 100%
>> capacity all the time, heck we're even importing refined gasoline to fill
>> the demand.  Pumping more out of the ground, to replace foreign supplied
>> crude won't materially help the "crunch".  It MIGHT
allow more crude to
> flow
>> to the expanding Chinese market though, but I would expect that newly
> pumped
>> crude to flow at current market prices.  Heck, having all of our reserves
> at
>> the "ready to pump" point, could be advantageous, when
the middle east
> pumps
>> dry, we could step in an become the new oil power (yea,
right)....
>>
>> Demand has to go down.  Shelley and I are now car-pooling several days a
>> week, keeping the Ford Windstar parked, and driving in the 96 Miata (28
>> MPG), which is nice, both the ride, companion in the car, and good gas
>> mileage.
>>
>> Maybe it's also time to "slow us down" again.  I was
never fond of the
>> "Double Nickel" speed limit, but interstate speeds have
gotten WAY out of
>> hand again.  Heck, if you go 5 MPH OVER the speed limit, you still get
>> run
>> over.
>>
>> I don't think there is any short term solution, but we're not really
> looking
>> at serious long term ones, either.
>>
>> I, for one, would like to see more "nucular" power
> intentional>.  The frenzy over problems, IMO, is grossly over-estimated.
>> The only serious/major plant problem is the Chernobyl meltdown, and that
> was
>> fatally flawed design, and blatant disregard for safety.  I believe
>> France
>> is getting 80+ percent of their power from nuclear power now.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Glenn M.
>> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
>> news:430dfb88$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> > They should go into effect at all until the democraps get on board with
>> > ANWR
>> > and other increases on the production side.
>> >
>> > Gary
>> >
>> > "Robert Comer"
 wrote in message
>> > news:430dc161{at}w3.nls.net...
>> >> Not to go into effect immediately, it's a start, not a
"good" start.
>> >>
>> >> - Bob Comer
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "John Cuccia"  wrote
in message
>> >> news:jnaqg19qb6mvfuosrgra3gh7uk7bqhpm7l{at}4ax.com...
>> >> > Looks like the administration is going to toughen, at least
>> >> > somenwat,
>> >> > economy standards on SUVs and light trucks.  It's a
good start at
>> >> > addressing the demand side of the equation.
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.parapundit.com/archives/002957.html
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5